Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones on Tuesday joined 21 other states in opposing a proposed United States Postal Service rule that would allow certain firearms to be sent through the mail, warning the change could undermine state gun laws and make it easier for prohibited individuals to obtain weapons.
In a multi-state comment letter, the attorneys general argue the proposal is unlawful and would create what they describe as a dangerous loophole in federal law that has restricted the mailing of concealable firearms for nearly a century.
“This loophole puts guns in the hands of those barred by Virginia law from buying weapons, and it allows people to blatantly dodge background checks and access illegal firearms,” Jones said in a statement. “The federal government continues to undermine the law and (is) putting our communities at risk in the process.”
The dispute stems from a January 2026 opinion issued by the U.S. Department of Justice under President Donald Trump’s administration, which concluded that a long-standing federal statute restricting the mailing of certain firearms is unconstitutional.
“So long as Congress chooses to run a parcel service, the Second Amendment precludes it from refusing to ship constitutionally protected firearms to and from law-abiding citizens, even if they are not licensed manufacturers or dealers,” the opinion stated.
The department said it would no longer enforce the law and directed the Postal Service to align its regulations accordingly.
On April 2, the Postal Service published a proposed rule that would conform to that guidance, prompting pushback from a coalition of states — including Virginia — that say the executive branch lacks the authority to override a law enacted by Congress in 1927.
In their letter, the attorneys general contend that the statute remains valid and enforceable, noting it has never been struck down by a court.
They argue that allowing firearms to be shipped through the mail without going through licensed dealers would bypass background check requirements and increase access for people barred from owning guns, including felons and domestic abusers.
The states also warn the change could complicate criminal investigations by weakening existing firearm tracing systems. Without federal trace data tied to licensed sellers, law enforcement agencies could face higher costs and new logistical challenges in tracking weapons used in crimes.
The proposal would mark a significant shift in how firearms move across state lines. Under current practice, federal law limits the mailing of concealable weapons through USPS, while private carriers such as UPS operate under their own policies and legal obligations regarding firearm shipments.
According to the letter, USPS “recognizes no statutory obligation” to ensure packages comply with varying state laws governing firearm purchases and transfers, raising concerns about enforcement gaps if the rule takes effect.
The attorneys general further argue that the Second Amendment does not require the Postal Service to permit firearm shipments, because the underlying federal law governs only the mailing of weapons, not the right to possess them.
They also point to historical precedent, noting that firearms were largely excluded from the mail for much of the nation’s history.
Beyond legal questions, the states say the proposal could carry financial consequences. They warn that state and local law enforcement agencies may need to develop new tracking systems to monitor firearms sent through the mail, adding strain to already tight budgets.
The letter outlines scenarios in which individuals prohibited from owning firearms under state law — including those with felony convictions or subject to restraining orders — could obtain weapons shipped from other states, potentially including firearms that are otherwise banned where they live.
Virginia joined a group of states led by New Jersey, New York and Delaware in signing the letter. Other states include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia.
The debate comes amid broader national disputes over gun policy and federal authority, as states continue to adopt different approaches to firearm regulation.
In Virginia, Gov. Abigail Spanberger last month amended and signed a sweeping package of gun legislation, marking one of the most significant overhauls of Virginia’s firearm laws in years.
The changes clarify a ban on the future sale of certain semi-automatic “assault” firearms, restore background checks for private sales, raise the minimum age for some purchases to 21 and impose new safe-storage requirements, while also expanding restrictions on where guns can be carried publicly.
At the same time, lawmakers across the country are grappling with how firearms are bought, sold and transported, particularly as online marketplaces and interstate transactions become more common.
The Postal Service proposal remains in the rulemaking process, and it remains unclear whether or how the agency will revise the measure in response to the states’ objections.
